From: Sergey Vlasov <vsu@altlinux.ru>
To: Kay Sievers <kay.sievers@vrfy.org>
Cc: Al Viro <viro@ftp.linux.org.uk>,
Roderich.Schupp.extern@mch.siemens.de,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
linux-hotplug-devel@lists.sourceforge.net,
Greg KH <greg@kroah.com>
Subject: Re: Race between "mount" uevent and /proc/mounts?
Date: Tue, 01 Nov 2005 19:54:49 +0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20051101195449.GA9162@procyon.home> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20051101035816.GA7788@vrfy.org>
[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1946 bytes --]
On Tue, Nov 01, 2005 at 04:58:16AM +0100, Kay Sievers wrote:
> On Tue, Nov 01, 2005 at 01:28:46AM +0100, Kay Sievers wrote:
> > Ok, makes sense. The attached seems to work for me. If we can get
> > something like this, we can remove the superblock claim/release events
> > completely and just read the events from the /proc/mounts file itself.
No, we need both events. When you need to tell the user when it is
safe to disconnect the storage device, the event from detach_mnt() is
useless - it happens too early. In fact, even the current way of
sending the event from kill_block_super() is broken, because the event
is generated before generic_shutdown_super() and sync_blockdev(), and
writing out cached data may take some time.
We could try to emit busy/free events from bd_claim() and
bd_release(); this would be triggered by most "interesting" users
(even opens with O_EXCL), but not by things like volume_id.
> New patch. Missed a check for namespace == NULL in detach_mnt().
[skip]
> +static unsigned int mounts_poll(struct file *file, poll_table *wait)
> +{
> + struct task_struct *task = proc_task(file->f_dentry->d_inode);
> + struct namespace *namespace;
> + int ret = 0;
> +
> + task_lock(task);
> + namespace = task->namespace;
> + if (namespace)
> + get_namespace(namespace);
> + task_unlock(task);
> +
> + if (!namespace)
> + return -EINVAL;
> +
> + poll_wait(file, &mounts_wait, wait);
> + if (namespace->mounts_poll_pending) {
> + namespace->mounts_poll_pending = 0;
> + ret = POLLIN | POLLRDNORM;
> + }
This assumes that there will be only one process per namespace which
will call poll() on /proc/mounts. Even though someone may argue that
it is the right approach (have a single process which watches
/proc/mounts and broadcasts updates to other interested processes,
e.g., over dbus), with the above implementation any unprivileged user
can call poll() and interfere with the operation of that designated
process.
[-- Attachment #2: Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 189 bytes --]
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2005-11-01 19:54 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 13+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
[not found] <0AD07C7729CA42458B22AFA9C72E7011C8EF@mhha22kc.mchh.siemens.de>
[not found] ` <20051025140041.GO7992@ftp.linux.org.uk>
2005-10-26 10:27 ` Race between "mount" uevent and /proc/mounts? Sergey Vlasov
2005-10-26 11:15 ` Al Viro
2005-10-26 14:34 ` Kay Sievers
2005-10-26 14:45 ` Xavier Bestel
2005-10-26 19:28 ` Al Viro
2005-11-01 0:28 ` Kay Sievers
2005-11-01 3:58 ` Kay Sievers
2005-11-01 19:54 ` Sergey Vlasov [this message]
2005-11-01 21:35 ` Kay Sievers
2005-11-02 13:01 ` Sergey Vlasov
2005-11-03 8:07 ` Al Viro
2005-11-03 10:52 ` Sergey Vlasov
2005-11-03 11:30 ` Al Viro
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20051101195449.GA9162@procyon.home \
--to=vsu@altlinux.ru \
--cc=Roderich.Schupp.extern@mch.siemens.de \
--cc=greg@kroah.com \
--cc=kay.sievers@vrfy.org \
--cc=linux-hotplug-devel@lists.sourceforge.net \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=viro@ftp.linux.org.uk \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).